memory_alphafandomcom-20200223-history
User talk:Renegade54/Archive01
Archive 1 (27 Dec 2005 - 17 Oct 2006) → Archive 2 (23 Oct 2006 - 12 Jun 2007) Wikipedia links I suppose it's good that you're applying the template in place of manual links, although I'm not sure I see much of a point in doing it myself. Do you think we need links to Wikipedia articles for pages like Chin'toka system? When I think about it, in most cases the Wikipedia page is -- or should be -- just a less detailed version of ours. I don't know though. --Vedek Dukat Talk | Duty Roster 20:27, 27 Dec 2005 (UTC) :I don't disagree... the links were already there to the Wikipedia articles, and I'm just cleaning them up. You're probably right about the lack of usefulness of some of those Trek-related Wikipedia articles. If ours aren't more complete, then we're doing something wrong! Renegade54 20:52, 27 Dec 2005 (UTC) ::That makes the template used even more useful. Via its "What links here" page, we can then check which pages have a link and probably need more information. Nice work... :) -- Cid Highwind 20:55, 27 Dec 2005 (UTC) Excellent point, Cid. Anyway, thanks for cleaning up the template, category, etc. stuff Renegade. --Vedek Dukat Talk | Duty Roster 20:36, 28 Dec 2005 (UTC) Category:Armed conflicts I don't know if you saw it or not, but there has already been a proposal for an armed conflicts category higher up on the Category suggestions page, under Wars/Conflicts. You might want to think about moving your proposal for the category and comments up to that page. Also, your "category demo" page Armed conflicts, "conflicts" with the already created page Military conflicts. I don't see a problem with keeping it (for now) as an category example and alphabetized list, but it might get deleted soon. Also, Military conflicts seems to have much more battles than your page does.--Tim Thomason 00:36, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC) :I hadn't noticed the proposal higher up on the page... my mistake, I should've looked more carefully, I guess! It would appear that the author of the other proposal had the same basic intent as me, though. And I can see a use for both an alphabetical listing and a chronological one, although an actual category would end up, by nature, being an alphabetical one. The entries in my demo list are only the pages I found on the page. I knew there would be a number of other pages that already had one or more categories applied to them, and doing a quick check of some of the other conflicts mentioned, that is indeed the case. Many of those, though, are falling only under the "pseudo-categories" like Template:pna or Category:Memory_Alpha_featured_articles. Other are currently categorized under the respective planets or systems they were fought in, such as Category:Earth. In any case, I still feel that Armed Conflicts is preferrable to Military Conflicts in that not all such conflicts are military in origin (although, certainly, most are) and just Conflicts is too broad, and not necessarily indicitive of the armed nature of a war, battle, rebellion, etc. Still plenty of room for discussion, apparently. :) :I'm also of the mind that most (if not all) articles should fall under at least one category. That may not be practical, but there are currently over 1000 that have no category at all, and, personally, I'd like to see that reduced. I may be in a minority on that, though... I'm not really sure. Renegade54 12:57, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC) Possesive form Not for nothing but the possesive form of a word ending in s (as in Nagus) is still to add 's. Only plural forms ending in s are made possesive by adding just the '. So technically, Nagus's staff is the correct possesiv. Logan 5 18:27, 12 Jan 2006 (UTC) Punctuation I noticed that you've been putting periods at the end of episode citations :He was assigned to Starbase 32. ( ).' not that its any concern of mine, but i believe this was discussed and people decided it was wasteful in 2004 or so. Just letting you know that they'll probably be removed by a copyeditor. -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk 16:38, 14 Jan 2006 (UTC) :Actually, if you look closely, what I've been doing is ''removing the periods at the end of citations. :) -- Renegade54 16:41, 14 Jan 2006 (UTC) Ha -- i needed my first cup of coffee before i could start squinting at these things. Right-o then. -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk 17:00, 14 Jan 2006 (UTC) Tagging episodes as PNA I don't know why this has been such an issue with our community, but we do have a template, which has been nominated for deletion. I think it could be useful, you might want to start using that instead and putting it in the Summary section. What do you think? --Vedek Dukat Talk | Duty Roster 23:02, 15 Jan 2006 (UTC) Wikicities (our host) is free, although I guess getting too superfluous would hurt their resources. The main isssue was the duty roster and whether to use the template or that page. I'll put a note on the template about clearing the ep from the duty roster before removing the template, that should be a good compromise. --Vedek Dukat Talk | Duty Roster 23:16, 15 Jan 2006 (UTC) :I was actually going to leave you a message asking you to apply the PNA template when you apply the nav template, but I see the issue was being discussed already. I think you should apply both templates though and avoid a second edit from me or someone else to apply the PNA one. Weyoun 08:15, 16 Jan 2006 (UTC) Constant edits to Kirk Please keep your edits to a minimum when making copyedits. Each time you save a page you are saving a duplicate file over the previous file. By using the show preview and limiting your edits to a minimum, you are helping us reduce the load on our database. In this case, your ten edits to the James Kirk page (which is almost 90kb in size) just created 10 x 90 kb files... Please use the "show preview" feature before saving your edits, thanks. --Alan del Beccio 01:30, 30 January 2006 (UTC) From User talk:Gvsualan :I always use the preview function before saving an edit. The many edits don't stem from that at all, but instead are from me editing one section at a time, rather than the whole page at once. Should we, then, refrain from using the section edit feature? -- Renegade54 01:40, 30 January 2006 (UTC) ::For the sake of convenience, especially in the case of making extremely minor edits like you were doing, I think it would be more efficient to do it at once -- both in monitoring recent changes and in preventing excessive loads on our database. Section editing is more practical if you are adding some volume of text, images, etc. --Alan del Beccio 02:06, 30 January 2006 (UTC) Thanks! Hey, on behalf of MA, thanks for making all those formatting improvements to articles. I believe that is one of MA's weak spots that not many people do. :) --Galaxy001 03:33, 7 February 2006 (UTC) *I'd also like to thank you for cleaning up after me (especially all those classical music articles)! I'm kind of writing them in a hurry, because I want to be finished by tonight, so Thanks alot! :-) --Jörg 18:42, 2 March 2006 (UTC) Challenge undertaken OK, I gave my first pass to Worf, and revised the Early Life section. If it's an improvement at all, I'm sure there's still stuff to fix. --Aurelius Kirk 12:53, 11 February 2006 (UTC) *Howdy, your edits to Worf were great, thanks. I wasn't sure about that new opening lead, but you really made it work welll. The artice is a mess now, and will look that way for a few days while I fact-check and string it all together. I wouldn't want you to waste any time with fine-tuned copyedits and formatting until it's all in better shape. --Aurelius Kirk 12:16, 12 February 2006 (UTC) Admin? Just wondering, have you ever considered going for being an admin? You seem to make a lot of contributions to the database, but I wanted to ask you. --Galaxy001 19:42, 12 February 2006 (UTC) Tricobaltx device I'm curious what you are doing with this article?--Alan del Beccio 07:28, 25 February 2006 (UTC) :Trying to move Tri-cobalt device to Tricobalt device... for some reason it wasn't allowing the move directly, so I was attempting to go through a temp rename. I just wrote Tim a message asking him to look at it. -- Renegade54 07:32, 25 February 2006 (UTC) ::Thanks :) -- Renegade54 07:33, 25 February 2006 (UTC) Re:Saul Thanks! :) Now I gotta work on Persis. She was a much more prominent character, yet her article has a lot less info. Anyways, thanks again for the compliment; it's much appreciated. :) --From Andoria with Love 06:02, 10 March 2006 (UTC) Searching In the edit summary of several of your month stubs (not marked oddly), you state "more to come when search works again." What do you mean by that? I don't know if Wikicities is going to go back to the old search engine or not, but it is quite simple using advanced search to look through just mainspace articles. See here for a list of all the main namespace articles mentioning the word "january."--Tim Thomason 00:11, 12 March 2006 (UTC) RE: Your Ten Forward comments I'm sorry, but this is not something I can simply "overlook." I am very curious to know at which point in my comment I insulted, embarassed or, for that matter, personally addressed you to deserve to be cold cocked like I was in your response to me? Please, I insist that you point my hurtful, degrading, or "annoying" words out to me, so as to help me justify why it was acceptable for someone to make a blatant '''personal attack like that, which this site claims to have no tolerance for, when all I simply stated was: that on a Star Trek wiki, an actual Star Trek character would be expected to be a more common or popular search result than an everyday real world term. I fail to see how this is "annoying," or that how my commenting on a page I just so happened to create has any bearing on what I said. Seriously, I've had over 25,000 edits on this site; it's a whole lot harder to find an article that I haven't had a part in creating, writing, rewriting or making a minor edit on, than it is to find one that I have contributed to. What does that have to do with anything? Are you saying I'm not allowed to have an opinion, or simply comment on an article which I took part in writing? Even so, I fail to see how that helps justify what you said? --Alan del Beccio 13:44, 12 March 2006 (UTC) Spanish Interwikis Hi, thanks for your effort, but actually my Bot was going to do that task as soon as the interwikis were activated, I will now start this -- Kobi - [[ :Kobi|( )]] 16:00, 10 April 2006 (UTC) Movie page links I thought (still do) that adding the preceding following likns to the infobox complemented the ones at the bottom. They saves scrolling when you are surfing said pages, and they remind the reader of the film order for the unnumbered films. —MJBurrage 07:32, 2 May 2006 (UTC) Beverly Washburn Hi, I was just curious why you edited out the appearances section? I was following another actor's page when I put that in. I thought maybe it was because she had only one appearance, but I've seen it done that way with other actors who have appeared once too. This isn't a complaint, I was just curious as to the reason. I thought it worked well, even though it repeats info from the very short bio. Is there a rule for this situation? Thanks! :Yeah, that's why... I figure it's rather redundant. There are two basic formats people seem to use when doing production writeups like that; one is to list the credits in the body (if there's only one or two) and the other is to present a (longer) list of credits after the writeup (usually if there's a bunch). Normally you'd do one or the other. There are probably a few that have slipped by that have both, but like I said, it seems rather redundant. I'd say, as a rule, if you want the credit at the end, then the body should be filled with other biographical info and/or non-Trek credits. Nothing against Beverly, per se! :) -- Renegade54 16:17, 9 May 2006 (UTC) Template:Calendar Hi Renegade. I saw you created "Template:Calendar", which I changed a bit, and commented on the talk page. I also didn't reply to your comment on User talk:Cid Highwind/Main Page yet, sorry for that. If you're interested in a calendar template, maybe we can work on that together? -- Cid Highwind 07:42, 17 May 2006 (UTC) :Hi Cid... yep, teamwork is good! :) Don't worry about not replying... happens all the time to most of us. I accidentally saved the template while I was experimenting with it (instead of clicking the preview button... it was late, and I was tired... oops!) so it really wasn't supposed to have been saved in that state. I was experimenting with various built-in functions (and I still am). My goal is to get something generic working, rather than having to have a template file for each date. -- Renegade54 08:35, 17 May 2006 (UTC) I guess that, in the end, that's the only way that really works. Alternatively, we could use parser functions (which include a "switch" statement) to collect information about more than one day on a template page, and then only display information of the current day - but that would only lead to a huge template that is much less maintainable than a collection of individual ones. Having "Template:Calendar" as a "sort of" redirect seems to be a good compromise, because it allows us to just include that template on any page we like without having to care about the correct usage of any magicwords... -- Cid Highwind 10:03, 17 May 2006 (UTC) Lists Articles don't have to be perfect to be put in the main article namespace; User:Renegade54/Alerts for example can be moved simply to Alerts unless you have something else in mind. --Vedek Dukat Talk | Duty Roster 20:43, 17 May 2006 (UTC) :No, I know they don't... but I like 'em to be a little more fleshed out that that before I put them into the main namespace. It'll be moved soon. :) Please feel free to add to any of my lists, btw. -- Renegade54 20:46, 17 May 2006 (UTC) Bible as a fantasy novel I figured that's what he meant. But I wouldn't call it fantasy. Maybe historical fiction. :) -- Sulfur 20:14, 22 May 2006 (UTC) Use of H2 in templates That doesn't look too bad, but we can't do it that way... Using NOEDITSECTION will remove all edit links from the page that incorporates the template, and I'm not sure what will happen to the table of contents if we're using H2 somewhere. It messes up something, that's for sure - have a look at Borg history. Let me find a way to achieve a similar result while avoiding H2, ok? -- Cid Highwind 12:50, 23 May 2006 (UTC) :Ooops, sorry... I didn't realize that the NOEDITSECTION magic word removed all the edit links... duh... It *does* get added to the table of contents as well. BAH! :( -- Renegade54 12:54, 23 May 2006 (UTC) No problem, the intention was a good one... :) If you want, you can now change all templates like I did for Template:Pna. -- Cid Highwind 13:12, 23 May 2006 (UTC) :OK, will do... thanks Cid! -- Renegade54 13:15, 23 May 2006 (UTC) Generations SE DVD You threw a pna-episode on this article? Why's that? I was under the impression that the movie summaries would be under the movie page, and the DVD page would only summarize what the package contains. Could you shed some light on that for me? -- Sulfur 13:52, 25 May 2006 (UTC) :Nope. No light whatsoever. Gotta stay in the dark. :Heh. You're right, I shouldn't have put that on a DVD article. I'll go smack myself around a bit... right after I'm done removing the pna. :) -- Renegade54 13:55, 25 May 2006 (UTC) Well, someone's gotta keep an eye on you I guess. Heheh. -- Sulfur 14:24, 25 May 2006 (UTC) Thanks for that! And yes, you do have my permission to make my page look better any time you like! :-) Incidentally, if I have a photo or something I want to put on a page, how do I do it? I don't speak Geek well enough to even know where to find information in the Wiki instructions . . :)Usenko 12:33, 31 May 2006 (UTC) SS Tsiolkovsky (К. Э. ЦИОЛКОВСКИЙ) Compromise Just wanted to say that you are a genius. --OuroborosCobra 05:14, 15 June 2006 (UTC) :lol... thanks! -- Renegade54 05:25, 15 June 2006 (UTC) re:Noicon class Yes, it would be possible to have the noicon class work on span as well, I'm just a little afraid of possible misuse. Span could be used to format any part of inline text, and I can already imagine iconless links popping up left and right just because someone thinks that "this link shouldn't have an icon" - leading to edit wars, more lengthy discussions, and above all, a pretty inconsistent look of the site. In what instances do you need to hide the icon of an external link while that link is not contained in a div (message box or similar)? -- Cid Highwind 19:36, 22 June 2006 (UTC) :Yeah, that would be a mess if that occurred. I wanted to use it in a new template that I created, Template:incite, to be able to add a citation notice inline (with the corresponding addition to Category:Memory Alpha pages needing citation) without adding the big citation notice to the whole page, for pages that are basically in good shape, but just need one line cited. The incite template has an edit link on it with an accompanying icon that I wanted to get rid of for aesthetic reasons. (It appears you've already used the incite template once yourself). It's certainly not a big deal to have the icon there, or to even eliminate the edit link from the template, if adding the "noicon" class to "span" would cause a problem. -- Renegade54 20:24, 22 June 2006 (UTC) re:Wiki problem? According to Sannse, these problems might have to do with one of the attempted upgrades. In any case, I temporarily(?) removed the "$3" from the recent changes message, and the bug was added to Wikia's buglist. -- Cid Highwind 12:20, 23 June 2006 (UTC) Formatting Thanks for fixing the formatting on my "star systems" articles. I am "taking notes" on the changes you are making so that hopefully I will not make the same mistakes again. --OuroborosCobra 02:21, 30 June 2006 (UTC) :No problem! One thing to note: there always should be a space after the colon (:), like in TNG: "Whatever". :) -- Renegade54 02:24, 30 June 2006 (UTC) #switch vs switch I'm not entirely certain what your changing this is intended to do, as it seems to have broken the templates even more than previously. I tried making that change before, but it makes thing look like 31 December rather than what they're supposed to look like. -- Sulfur 18:36, 6 July 2006 (UTC) :Someone is doing something to the wiki software as we speak... I'm assuming they're doing an upgrade. The standard format for the parser functions is using a pound sign (#). That's the way all the templates work on Wikipedia currently. Just hold on for a bit until all the changes ripple through the server. -- Renegade54 18:38, 6 July 2006 (UTC) I was under the impression that we didn't use the same software as wikipedia, so mayhaps this software here doesn't use the same hash mark stuff? idaknow. I guess we'll see if/when they fix the software, Eh? -- Sulfur 18:52, 6 July 2006 (UTC) ::As mentioned on our announcements page, the Mediawiki software is temporarily changed to a later version to test different things, then "downgraded" again later. This is an ongoing process, and I'm sure we will be notified if the update is permanent. So please don't change any parser functions to the newer version (with '#') at the moment. Thanks. -- Cid Highwind 19:39, 6 July 2006 (UTC) :::Missed that announcement... sorry. I'll try to be patient. :) -- Renegade54 19:42, 6 July 2006 (UTC) sniping would you be so kind as to not rush editing pages until you are sure someone is done working with them. It is rather annoying to be working on cleaning up pages (page moves and image replacements) only to find that in the one or two minutes it takes me to do what i need to do there is already an edit conflict. i really dont think it is necessary for me to add an "inuse" template when i will have done what I am doing in a matter of a few seconds or minutes. it makes life easier for us all. thanks. --Alan del Beccio 21:06, 12 July 2006 (UTC) :Sure, no problem. Sorry about that! -- Renegade54 21:08, 12 July 2006 (UTC) You have been nominated for administratorship Just a heads up, Bp has nominated you for administratorship. --OuroborosCobra talk 18:31, 26 July 2006 (UTC) Date Templates, Birthdays, et al Thanks for fixing the March 11 one for me. I'm working through early production history people to try and add the missing ones to birthdays, date templates, and (obviously) the early production history page (which I thought was done, but never thought of walking through all of the links to it... go me!). So, note that I'll be a bit behind on doing up all of the template pages until I'm done so that I only have to update the EPH and birthday pages once (rather than 20-30 times each). -- Sulfur 15:47, 27 July 2006 (UTC) :No problem. I started going through all the actors alphabetically to check (and fix) the birthdates. I got through all the As and most of the Bs... heh. -- Renegade54 15:49, 27 July 2006 (UTC) I know what you mean, I got through EPH, 1964, 1965, 1966, and part of 1967 productions before burning out a bit on those. I figure that at least this way I can finish off the EPH stuff and feel like I've accomplished something. :) -- Sulfur 15:53, 27 July 2006 (UTC) You have made a mistake. You have the wrong person or ip number, I did not write anything about Wales. I have no idea what you are talking about. Thank you 71.241.127.168 Re:Performers Actually, I don't think you were misinformed... I think in most cases, that's how it is for categories, but looking at the performers category, it says it's a "list of performers" that "has all actors and actresses who appeared in, or gave voice to, roles in any Star Trek series". At present, all of the performers articles have both the parent category and at least one other sub-category (i.e. TOS performers, TNG performers, etc.) attached to them. So the performers category seems to be some kind of exception to the rule. However, I would not take my word for it – this may be something worth bringing up in the category's talk page. --From Andoria with Love 22:34, 2 August 2006 (UTC) Failed NFA Well, sorry to say that Gv successfully blocked your NFA. After reading your response, I am even more confident that you could be trusted to be an admin. Anyway, we plan to try again next month. Thanks for all the "mindless" work. :) --Bp 08:52, 11 August 2006 (UTC) :Oh, I had no doubts that he'd succeed. As I mentioned, it's not a big deal. I do wish people would acknowledge that article editing is a worthwhile endeavor, and that, as this wiki matures, it becomes more and more important that it has a consistent look and feel and correct grammar, spelling, punctuation, etc. Without that, MA looks unprofessional and amateurish, and it's hard to be taken seriously and as an authoritative source. Appearances are important, and while in the early stages of a wiki content is paramount, later on the details become more critical. -- Renegade54 16:35, 11 August 2006 (UTC) ::Sorry you didn't make it Renegade. I agree with all that you are saying, and I voted for ya. I will again. --OuroborosCobra talk 16:49, 11 August 2006 (UTC) Re:Math markup Yes, I'm getting the same error. I contacted Wikia staff about it, and Bp told me that he did the same some time ago. It must already be on their list of things to fix... ;) -- Cid Highwind 19:07, 16 August 2006 (UTC) Re:Oddness Not if I can help it. :P --From Andoria with Love 02:33, 18 August 2006 (UTC) calendar templates The templates Template:Yesterday, Template:Tomorrow month, and, Template:Tomorrow cell are listed on Memory Alpha:Votes for deletion. If this is part of something you are still developing you might want to mention it there. --Bp 05:30, 19 August 2006 (UTC) Channel IDs Hiya, Renegade. For the record, Channel IDs are the TV network logos seen (typically) in the lower right corner of the screen during an episode. For example, on MA we've seen images carry the UPN and CityTV logos, as those were the channels that were broadcasting the show. Hope that clarifies things. :) --From Andoria with Love 17:30, 24 August 2006 (UTC) :Yep, thanks... now I understand. :) -- Renegade54 17:31, 24 August 2006 (UTC) Timestream I wanted to thank you for your corrections to the Timestream images anyway (no history buff when it comes to American history ;-)) but I got distracted by uploading, ehm timestream images ;-) I realized only now that there already was an image of lightning. The footage is from the beginning of the sequence, so it was just incorrectly placed as the last image on the page. Now we have two images of lightning, one should be enough, so I suggest one has to be nominated for deletion then. I'll continue uploading the remaining images, if you find the time, could you put the smaller image on the images for deletion page? Otherwise I'll just do it once I'm finished with the timestream. And, thanks for your comment regarding the images! :-) --Jörg 16:33, 3 September 2006 (UTC) NFA Just a heads up, I have nominated you for administratorship. Good luck. --OuroborosCobra talk 19:45, 12 September 2006 (UTC) :And it went through after >7 days, with 7 votes for and 0 against. Congratulations :) If there's anything you need to know regarding new functions available to you now, don't hesitate to ask. -- Cid Highwind 09:21, 20 September 2006 (UTC) ::Thanks, Cid! -- Renegade54 11:50, 20 September 2006 (UTC) Congratulations! I am quite happy for you, being your sponsor and all. --OuroborosCobra talk 01:05, 21 September 2006 (UTC) :Hey, just thought I'd give you a belated congratulations on acquiring your administratorship. I'm glad it went through this time. So, welcome to the "admin club" and as Cid said, if you have any questions about the new admin functions, don't hesitate to ask! :) --From Andoria with Love 16:46, 27 September 2006 (UTC) ::Thanks, to both! :) -- Renegade54 18:08, 27 September 2006 (UTC) deleting some un-used redirects I was wondering why you deleted "Memory Alpha:How to start a page", "Memory Alpha:How to log in", and "Memory Alpha:How to edit a page". One of the reason's for redirects is to help people find something they are searching for. They don't all have to be linked somewhere. The mediawiki search is weak, it needs help like this. --Bp 14:12, 21 September 2006 (UTC) Piping links I'm really not sure it is necessary to pipe date links, in regards of 1881. This is exactly why we have 1881 as a redirect. Cutting that link off, cuts off the "what links here" function, which would be especially useful for someone who may wish to find what links to "1881." --Alan del Beccio 00:47, 23 September 2006 (UTC) :OK, that's a good point. I normally try to eliminate redirects, and link directly to the article referenced, but in this case, that would be, like you said, a useful way to find references to, say, "1881" rather than doing a search. -- Renegade54 00:53, 23 September 2006 (UTC) pna-episode Since you tagged * * as incomplete, I would like to know if you still consider these (summaries) incomplete? If so, could you say why? Thanks Rcog 02:34, 24 September 2006 (UTC) :When I first added those pnas, I think the episode summaries were non-existent for those articles. They're both still a bit skimpy, in my opinion, especially (compared to some of the other summaries). I guess it's a matter of personal opinion, to a certain extent, but I think most folks would consider to need fleshed out a bit more, if not . -- Renegade54 02:52, 24 September 2006 (UTC) Ok. I will remove the tag then. may be borderline (though there are still a lot of worse cases out there) but it still summarize the whole episode. Personally, I find to be ok in length. I think a summary like this one is too long to read while not as detailed as the real script. --Rcog 18:28, 24 September 2006 (UTC) :I tend to agree that ones like that are too long. We seem to go back and forth on length of summaries without every coming to a consensus on the "right" length. There are some folks here that feel summaries like "Broken Bow" are great, and that they all should be like that. Others feel that a single paragraph is the right length. I do wish there was some standard that we all held to, just for the sake of consistency. -- Renegade54 18:33, 24 September 2006 (UTC) Re:Admin question Yeah, I don't know why Alan decided to delete those revisions. They seem useful to me, but he may have a good reason we don't know about. for the record, this topic came up between him and me a while back; you can check that out here. He basically replied with the same answer I gave you, only in greater detail (and clarity). Enjoy that. :) --From Andoria with Love 02:35, 3 October 2006 (UTC) Timeline nav bar Wouldn't it make more sense to have one of the bots do that maybe, if only so that they don't fill up the recent logs? :) just a thought to maybe save your brain cells which must surely be dying at the moment from the menial task at hand... -- Sulfur 02:38, 5 October 2006 (UTC) :heh... yeah, it is kinda mind-numbing. The only problem with a bot doing it is that I'm cleaning up each one as I go along (format, links, spelling, etc.) A lot probably don't need anything but the nav bar, though... -- Renegade54 02:59, 5 October 2006 (UTC) ::With all the formatting fixing you do, and the massive amounts of it, I've practically decided you're a living bot anyways :P --OuroborosCobra talk 03:16, 5 October 2006 (UTC) :Hey, bot this, bud!! hehe... you'd think that people could take a hint from how everything else is already formatted, but noooooo. Just ask Sulfur about his memorable quotes reformatting. :) -- Renegade54 03:22, 5 October 2006 (UTC) Bug with images I've been talking with JasonR on IRC, and the bug seems to have been fixed. I have confirmed this by looking at images that we did not try to revert during the bug, and they have indeed been fixed. Those images that we were reverting during the bug got messed up by us doing that, but I have fixed all of them. I have gone through recent changes just to see if there is anything that I missed, but I have gotten all of them that we messed with. I think we can remove the notice now. --OuroborosCobra talk 19:12, 5 October 2006 (UTC) US Comic Arcs I see that you've started splitting that article apart further. I've been considering doing that for ages and ages, but never quite gotten around to it. The first several arcs have had their start dates added into the date templates, so if, when you're splitting those arcs off, you could add in the relevant dates and whatnot... that'd be fantastic! :) -- Sulfur 23:59, 6 October 2006 (UTC) :OK, will do! -- Renegade54 00:10, 7 October 2006 (UTC) New template Hi. Just curious, what is the purpose of this new template ("Template:Maforum"). All it is a link to the off site forums (which I have never seen actually used). It would seem to me to be far more efficient to just put the link directly into the articles, rather than through a template. This kind of goes along with Bp's "Template madness" to me. --OuroborosCobra talk 16:40, 17 October 2006 (UTC) :The link to the forum site just changed a few days ago, so now I'm having to track down every page with a link to the forum to fix the link. By replacing the hard-coded link with a template, if and when the link changes in the future, we can change it in one place instead of manually trying to find everywhere it's referenced. That's exactly the type of thing a template is designed to be used for. :) -- Renegade54 16:44, 17 October 2006 (UTC) ::Yep, that template definitely makes sense, changing the hardcoded URLs to a templated version was a good idea. However, seeing that reminded me of the fact that the forum itself seems no longer useful. I already started a thread about this on MA:TF. -- Cid Highwind 09:46, 17 October 2006 (PDT)